 |
 |

Retarded Cleavage Rates of Preimplantation Monkey Embryos In Vitro
Olivier Kreitmann, MD;
Gary D. Hodgen, PhD
JAMA. 1981;246(6):627-629.
Abstract
We describe disparities of cleavage rates in vitro vs in vivo using monkey embryos. Embryos were recovered from living monkeys by retrograde irrigation of the Fallopian tubes after spontaneous ovulation and normal fertilization in vivo. Cleavage rates of the embryos were studied in vitro, employing two culture media. The progression of embryonic development was compared with that in the natural setting (in vivo). The findings indicate that monkey embryos developing in vitro kept pace with the expected time course for only about 24 hours; indeed, extracorporeal conditions using either culture medium were insufficient to sustain normal cleavage rates thereafter. The asynchrony between cleavage rates in the two milieus may contribute substantially to perinidatory embryo wastage and subsequent implantation failure, even after successful in vitro fertilization.
(JAMA 1981;246:627-629)
Author Affiliations
From the Pregnancy Research Branch, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md. Dr Kreitmann is now with the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, International Medical Research Center, Franceville, Gabon, Africa.
Footnotes
The abstract of this article was presented at the World Conference on Embryo Transfer, In Vitro Fertilization, and Instrumental Insemination, Kiel, West Germany, Sept 24, 1980.
Reprint requests to Pregnancy Research Branch, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Bldg 18, Room 101, Bethesda, MD 20205 (Dr Hodgen).
CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati
What's this?
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
Embryo Transfer and Ectopic Pregnancy-Reply
Hodgen
JAMA 1984;251:2660-2660.
ABSTRACT
Surrogate Embryo Transfer Combined With Estrogen-Progesterone Therapy in Monkeys: Implantation, Gestation, and Delivery Without Ovaries
Hodgen
JAMA 1983;250:2167-2171.
ABSTRACT
|